Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 12/8/2001 12:56:38 PM EST
I don't own an AR at the moment, but am thinking about it-Seriously! I've shot them many times in the military. I own an AK at the moment. I'm not interested in bench shooting or justification of the price on an AR.

I REALLY don't want this to be an AK vs AR discussion!!!!

What I want to know, is how effective do you think an AR is at doing its intended job? This might seem like a stupid question because if It didn't do it correctly, the military and some swat teams wouldn't have/be using it, and of course all the AR urban sniper rifle articles you see everywhere, but it is a serious question. What I want to know is why or why don't you think that it is a good weapon (a biased answer is expected of course :D ). Again, not an AK vs. AR discussion.

Another thing that I am having a hard time with, is the AR chambered simply for a high speed .22. Sentiments on that? In your opinion, do you believe that .223 round is better, worse, or equal than the 7.62x39 round? In other words, if you had your choice on which one to get shot with, which one would you like it to be (not getting shot would be best, but it wasn't an option)?

Thanks
Link Posted: 12/8/2001 1:03:12 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/8/2001 1:29:56 PM EST
thanks for the reply! i don't know the first thing about it, and wasn't trying to insult it but trying to understand it. and also trying to overcome this possible mental fallicy i have about the round. i often ask the questions that a lot of ppl have on their mind but are affraid to ask hat
thanks
Link Posted: 12/8/2001 1:48:07 PM EST
i wish i could provide you w/ the link, it came up on the board a while back but, i reaad this balistick report on the 5.56 and other porular assault rifle rounds. any way, the gist of it was(and they had pic of the shot gelitin) the 5.56 fragments upon impact causing way more tissue damage than 7.62x39 or 7.62 NATO (and the test were done w/ FMJ bullets). I know im not being scientific so try typing "wound balistics" into the search engine. as for the AR I got mine cuz of the superior acuracy.
Link Posted: 12/8/2001 2:17:55 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/8/2001 3:11:53 PM EST
The most important thing is the shooter. A smart, well trained shooter who takes advantage of terrain, element of surprise, cover and concealment and the principle of economy of force is what makes the difference.

A Lee Enfield in the hands of such a man can kill many foes armed with AK's or AR's.

Now..having said all of that..a rifle like any piece of hardware..can give a shooter an "edge".

Is the AR a good choice ? Well it depends on your shooter and your "mission". What are you expecting out of it.

IF you keep your AR VERY CLEAN and IF distances are short and IF your opponents are not crouching behind good cover..then the AR is just fine.

Neither 7.62 NATO, 7.62 x 39 or 5.56 NATO or 5.45 x 39 is the best combat round. A BETTER cartridge would be a: 6 - 7 mm caliber with a minimum muzzle velocity of 2800 fps.

Your .243, 257 Roberts, 6.5 x 55 , 6.5-08, 7-08 7 x 57, 284 are better rounds.

Unfortunatley most modern combat rifles are chambered in 7.62 NATO, 7.62 x 39 or 5.56 NATO or 5.45 x 39. If you want a GREAT 22 cal cartridge..22 PPC. Is more efficient, more accurate and has a higher muzzle velocity than the .223.

The Ergonomics of the AR15 are very good..but then so are the ergonomics of a Daewoo or AR18.

I prefer a 7.62 NATO over 5.56 NATO because I can get better penetration of cover. It is heavier so I carry less, but that is the trade off.

There is NO magic Cartridge or Magic Rifle that will be the best in all things. The best you can hope for is to carefully consider all of the advantages and disadvantages of each rifle and cartridge and base you decision on what you can afford and what you will need and hope that you've made the right choice.
Link Posted: 12/8/2001 7:03:22 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 12:32:49 AM EST
The AR is more than effective for what it's desgined for. I own both the AK and the AR. Currently that's running at more AK's than AR's, but AK's cost less, so I use that as my reason to buy another

You have an AK, so you already are familiar with that. The AR is generally a more accurate gun. Even just the rack grade AR is capable of better accuracy than an AK. Some of this is because of ammo, some of this is because the sights are better on the AR for accurate shooting, and some other reasons, but the bottom line is they shoot smaller groups. They are also a lighter gun generally. That's a big plus for what it was designed for, carrying it on the battlefield.

The modular design is a big plus (and one of the reasons I have fewer ARs) you can just buy a different upper, and have what amounts to a different gun. Lower cost than buying a whole new rifle if you want a different configuration.

As far as the caliber goes, the 5.56mm is probably a better round than the 7.62mm x 39 for soft targets/longer range. I think the 7.62 would be better on harder targets, like cars. I think the 5.45mm is a great round, and about on par with the older 5.56mm. I don't think there's too much of a difference in getting shot dead by any of the three. People will rant and rave about the differences, but you can probably cite case examples for the effectiveness of any caliber in a comparison.

You should buy an AR (just don't sell your AK).

Ross

Link Posted: 12/9/2001 4:39:00 AM EST
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 6:37:36 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/9/2001 6:32:44 AM EST by PitViper]


IF you keep your AR VERY CLEAN and IF distances are short and IF your opponents are not crouching behind good cover..then the AR is just fine.



Not really. I'm the world's worst to not clean my rifle (right now, it's had over 3K through it with just a shot of clp and a bore snake once in a while, and) and it's so far as reliable as any AK I've owned (and moreso than any of the milled out junkers on the market now that I always see being cleared of stoppages at the range)...My other ARs were also subjected to this type of treatment with again, no failures (other than bad mags and shitty ammo).
Also, at the ranges it was designed for, the 5.56 round can penetrate fairly significant cover. I agree with your very astute observations regarding picking the right tool for the job at hand, and learn to use it to the maximum of your ability. You are totally correct..there is no one magically "best" round or rifle for every function.
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 6:47:00 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/9/2001 6:44:18 AM EST by exilefromhell]
Thanks for all the reply's and the links!!! I'm learning. Keep it coming!

Another thing that I heard from an AR owner was that the .223 is a more human round. Designed to exit as opposed to a hollow point of the most popular and widely available 7.62. Do you agree with that? I'm sure that you can get .223 in HP right?
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 11:42:27 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:56:59 PM EST
I am glad that I asked this question! And what I think is that it all boils down to why I bought the AK before the AR (<---if I do buy one now). And that is- what I am going to use it for?

Would it be wrong to say, that in this instance, the difference between the two are almost like arguing the difference between the 0-60MPH times of rival sports cars- almost negligible?

Thanks!
Top Top